How does the iPF6100 compare to the HP Z3100 and Epson 7880?
Problems with iPF6100: Covered in the Known Problems section of the Wiki.
Problems with HP Z3100:Weak reds, especially on matte papers. Pizza wheels/roller marks on gloss papers experienced by some (update 12/8/07: hardware fix will be made available free by HP per this LL thread). Ink overspray with heavy/continuous use. Firmware/drivers not mature yet, although Firmware version 6 released end of October, 2007. See also the HP Z3100 Wiki to help with your purchase decision.
Problems with Epson 7880: Substantial ink wasted in swapping photo black and matte black. Unknown at this time whether it will be less than the 90 ml needed for swap on Epson 7800. Significant potential for clogging, especially if not used regularly (based on Epson 7800 experience), with subsequent waste of ink and time.
Feature
Canon iPF6100
HP Z3100
Epson 7880
Ink Wasted to switch blacks
None
None
90 ml / 90 ml
Time to Switch black ink
None
None
20 minutes / 20 minutes
Cost of Roundtrip Switch
None
None
$68.40
Roll Feed Motorized
Yes (makes loading the roll extremely easy)
Yes
Roll Length Tracking
Yes (prints barcode & reads it when roll reloaded)
Roll and sheets loaded at same time
No (roll unloads automatically when use top manual feed)
Works fine through driver, can't be used with plugin
?
Yes
Clogging Problems
None reported
None reported
Unknown
Weight
Approximately 145 lbs with stand
143 lbs with stand
131 lbs
Size (H X W X D) in inches
46.3 X 39.1 X 35.2
49.7 X 41.2 X 26 inches
46 X 46 X 40
Gamut
Better dark blues and medium greens
Better warmer colors
Grayscale Range
Quality of B&W Prints
Very good, extremely neutral, very little bronzing
DMax on Harman FB Al Gloss
DMax on HPR
1.58 per Outback Photo review
1.70 per LL thread
Ink Water Resistant
Yes.
Yes.
Gloss Differential & Bronzing
Bronzing almost completely eliminated
Almost none
Relative Rendering Intent has Blackpoint Compensation Available
NO for plugin; workaround available;
Yes if printing from Photoshop
through regular 8 bit driver
Yes
Yes
Paper Transport Issues Causing Smuding/Head Strikes
Longevity of prints
No data available; approx. 95 years for iPF5000
100 years bare bulb
250 years under glass
Quantity/Quality of supplied profiles
17 profiles for Canon papers made with Xrite Profilemaker
Excellent
Time to print at highest quality
Printer stand
Standard
Standard
Standard
Interface
Ethernet, USB 2.0
Ethernet, USB 2.0
Ethernet, USB 2.0
Standby power consumption
< 6 watts
27 watts
< 5 watts
Standby noise
None detectable
Fan runs continuously +
Sound level
49 dB
50 dB
Consistency Between Printers
Canon claims < 2 delta E with calibration
Quality of Manufacturer website
Poor (but Wiki sufficient, so this is
a minor but very annoying problem)
Good
Documentation
Excellent per LL
Very Good
+ Comment from Paul Butzi: "This fan runs constantly. It is by no means a noisy fan, but it is far noisier than it needs to be. And it runs all the time, even when the printer is in ’sleep’ mode. It runs day and night. Did I mention that this fan runs non-stop, 24/7, constantly?"
++ Comment from Avalan: "I printed on breathing color chromata canvas - 20.5 mil - with no problems or head strikes."
Comments from Wayne Fox on LL forum thread about iPF6100 vs HP Z3100:
The real question being asked here is a Canon ipf6100 vs. an HPz3100. Canon sent me an ipf6100 about 10 days ago, and have enjoyed seeing what the printer can do. I spent about 2 weeks with a 44" z3100 a couple of months ago, and currently own 2 Epson 3800's, a 4800, and a 9800. I ordered the Epson 11880 immediately upon reading about it, and after examining prints made on the 11880, the 9880 and 9800 as well as Canon printers at photoshop world, I am excited about this new printer. I also still have an ipf5000 Canon sent to me shortly before they were introduced and tested it for a few weeks back then.
So I'm sort of an Epson guy, but I've had a chance to play in depth with all of them. From that perspective I will say I believe the 6100 is an outstanding printer, and I'm getting gorgeous prints ... every bit as good as my 3800. Not better mind you, but side by side it is incredibly difficult to find any difference, especially one significant enough to base a purchase decision on output quality alone. The new black inks do make a difference, and black and white prints I did on Museum Etching look really nice on both printers. I see less grain and smoother transition detail than I remember with the ipf5000.
My personal feeling is that I like the output from the Epson and the Canon better than the z3100. The HP is a great printer, but I found it more challenging to maintain delicate transition details, and struggled with reds, especially rich reds. The gloss optimizer is nice if you do a lot of photo papers, but gloss differential and bronzing really isn't much of an issue for any of these printers now.
I mentioned a few days ago (I believe in this thread) about challenges using the front loading manual feed for thicker material on the ipf6100. I finally did figure it out and now I'll admit it isn't that bad, so my only criticism of the Canon ipf6100 is again in documentation (it shouldn't have been that hard to figure out). The user interface for printing is still a struggle (let's be honest, printing interfaces should be better for all printers, but I think Canon is the worst of the 3). That being said, it is better than the ipf5000, and once you figure it out isn't an issue.
One final opinion when comparing the z3100 to the 6100 (or the Epsons for that matter) is in regards to the onboard eyeone and self profiling. While I commend HP for the idea, and I know everyone is excited about it, I personally think profiling is going in a different direction. The self-calibration of the new Canon printers seems insignificant, but in reality it is a big deal. It puts them at a level that Epson seems to have achieved, especially with the 3800, that being the printers are very consistent. It isn't that the printer is consistent with itself, it is consistent with other printers. Paper makers will be able to provide canned profiles that are equal to or better than you can make for yourself. I believe the Canon is consistent enough that most of the good media out there will have canned profiles very quickly. So it just doesn't seem to be worth the extra money to buy one in the printer. 5 years ago this would have been remarkable, but seems unnecessary now.
Please understand this printer may have issues that no one knows about ... it's too new. So my comments are regarding output quality, not build quality. It could very well be the roll feed system of the printer is flakey and a month or two from now the net will be full of people upset that they bought the printer based on what someone said. I will say the printer seems well built, and I had very little trouble loading paper with very few skewing errors, even with the front manual slot (once I finally figured how to use it with my preferred paper choices.) As far as build quality it isn't new, it is pretty much identical to the 6000, so instinct tells me it's going to be fine. But no one knows right now, so if that worries you, I guess you can wait or look at other makers.
Finally I do have a couple of broad recommendations. If you don't need roll feed, don't switch between photo blacks too often and only need a 17" printer, the Epson 3800 is a strong contender. Beautiful quality, and I have 0 clogs in over 2 months between 2 printers. If you need roll feed and need to switch blacks more than occasionally, the Canon would be my choice. I've heard the new 80 series reduces the amount of ink it takes to swap, but it will still take more than the Canon (which doesn't require any). If you are the rare user that prints on heavy stock ... especially heavy roll stock, the straight through paper path design of the 7880 is something you should look at closely ... the Canon does present some challenges there.
How does the iPF6100 compare to the HP Z3100 and Epson 7880?
Problems with iPF6100: Covered in the Known Problems section of the Wiki.
Problems with HP Z3100: Weak reds, especially on matte papers. Pizza wheels/roller marks on gloss papers experienced by some (update 12/8/07: hardware fix will be made available free by HP per this LL thread). Ink overspray with heavy/continuous use. Firmware/drivers not mature yet, although Firmware version 6 released end of October, 2007. See also the HP Z3100 Wiki to help with your purchase decision.
Problems with Epson 7880: Substantial ink wasted in swapping photo black and matte black. Unknown at this time whether it will be less than the 90 ml needed for swap on Epson 7800. Significant potential for clogging, especially if not used regularly (based on Epson 7800 experience), with subsequent waste of ink and time.
Feature
Canon iPF6100
HP Z3100
Epson 7880
in my tests, 1.5 for darkest prints
Yes if printing from Photoshop
through regular 8 bit driver
250 years under glass
a minor but very annoying problem)
+ Comment from Paul Butzi: "This fan runs constantly. It is by no means a noisy fan, but it is far noisier than it needs to be. And it runs all the time, even when the printer is in ’sleep’ mode. It runs day and night. Did I mention that this fan runs non-stop, 24/7, constantly?"
++ Comment from Avalan: "I printed on breathing color chromata canvas - 20.5 mil - with no problems or head strikes."
Comments from Wayne Fox on LL forum thread about iPF6100 vs HP Z3100:
The real question being asked here is a Canon ipf6100 vs. an HPz3100. Canon sent me an ipf6100 about 10 days ago, and have enjoyed seeing what the printer can do. I spent about 2 weeks with a 44" z3100 a couple of months ago, and currently own 2 Epson 3800's, a 4800, and a 9800. I ordered the Epson 11880 immediately upon reading about it, and after examining prints made on the 11880, the 9880 and 9800 as well as Canon printers at photoshop world, I am excited about this new printer. I also still have an ipf5000 Canon sent to me shortly before they were introduced and tested it for a few weeks back then.
So I'm sort of an Epson guy, but I've had a chance to play in depth with all of them. From that perspective I will say I believe the 6100 is an outstanding printer, and I'm getting gorgeous prints ... every bit as good as my 3800. Not better mind you, but side by side it is incredibly difficult to find any difference, especially one significant enough to base a purchase decision on output quality alone. The new black inks do make a difference, and black and white prints I did on Museum Etching look really nice on both printers. I see less grain and smoother transition detail than I remember with the ipf5000.
My personal feeling is that I like the output from the Epson and the Canon better than the z3100. The HP is a great printer, but I found it more challenging to maintain delicate transition details, and struggled with reds, especially rich reds. The gloss optimizer is nice if you do a lot of photo papers, but gloss differential and bronzing really isn't much of an issue for any of these printers now.
I mentioned a few days ago (I believe in this thread) about challenges using the front loading manual feed for thicker material on the ipf6100. I finally did figure it out and now I'll admit it isn't that bad, so my only criticism of the Canon ipf6100 is again in documentation (it shouldn't have been that hard to figure out). The user interface for printing is still a struggle (let's be honest, printing interfaces should be better for all printers, but I think Canon is the worst of the 3). That being said, it is better than the ipf5000, and once you figure it out isn't an issue.
One final opinion when comparing the z3100 to the 6100 (or the Epsons for that matter) is in regards to the onboard eyeone and self profiling. While I commend HP for the idea, and I know everyone is excited about it, I personally think profiling is going in a different direction. The self-calibration of the new Canon printers seems insignificant, but in reality it is a big deal. It puts them at a level that Epson seems to have achieved, especially with the 3800, that being the printers are very consistent. It isn't that the printer is consistent with itself, it is consistent with other printers. Paper makers will be able to provide canned profiles that are equal to or better than you can make for yourself. I believe the Canon is consistent enough that most of the good media out there will have canned profiles very quickly. So it just doesn't seem to be worth the extra money to buy one in the printer. 5 years ago this would have been remarkable, but seems unnecessary now.
Please understand this printer may have issues that no one knows about ... it's too new. So my comments are regarding output quality, not build quality. It could very well be the roll feed system of the printer is flakey and a month or two from now the net will be full of people upset that they bought the printer based on what someone said. I will say the printer seems well built, and I had very little trouble loading paper with very few skewing errors, even with the front manual slot (once I finally figured how to use it with my preferred paper choices.) As far as build quality it isn't new, it is pretty much identical to the 6000, so instinct tells me it's going to be fine. But no one knows right now, so if that worries you, I guess you can wait or look at other makers.
Finally I do have a couple of broad recommendations. If you don't need roll feed, don't switch between photo blacks too often and only need a 17" printer, the Epson 3800 is a strong contender. Beautiful quality, and I have 0 clogs in over 2 months between 2 printers. If you need roll feed and need to switch blacks more than occasionally, the Canon would be my choice. I've heard the new 80 series reduces the amount of ink it takes to swap, but it will still take more than the Canon (which doesn't require any). If you are the rare user that prints on heavy stock ... especially heavy roll stock, the straight through paper path design of the 7880 is something you should look at closely ... the Canon does present some challenges there.